[WikiEN-l] Who's moderated?

[Armed Blowfish]

On 05/09/07, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/5/07, Rich Holton <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:
>> * I prefer the moderators to use moderation sparingly. I'd rather that I
>> make the decision of who I should ignore. Of course, pure spam should be
>> moderated. And abusive posts as well. But I would rather not see someone
>> moderated for simply being disliked and persistent.
>
> It's a fine line. IMHO we're there to keep discussion moving along. If
> every post from a certain user is causing a flurry of indignant "how
> dare you use language like that", "oh sorry that's just the way I
> talk, no offence caused", then they can really clog up a list and
> reduce the signal to noise ratio.
>
>> * Somewhere in the thread it was mentioned that most non-automatic
>> moderations are announced on list. I know I seen such announcements in
>
> Mostly that happens to avoid confusion as to why a loud voice suddenly
> disappeared in the middle of a discussion. People get moderated for
> other reasons without such fanfare.
>
>> * Which raises a third point, or question really: Are there times when a
>> contributor is put on moderation and intentionally not announced to the
>> list? That would be troubling...the exception being, I suppose, if
>
> No, that would be weird. More likely, someone is moderated for blatant
> list abuse (eg, spamming) and no explicit announcement is made, but if
> anyone asks, we confirm it.
>
>> someone were to request that it not be announced to the list in their
>> case, but that seems an unlikely scenario, since as I understand it,
>> there is no "negotiating" over moderation.
>
> Dunno about "negotiating" but if someone really wanted to be
> unmoderated, they're certainly entitled to ask politely. But it's
> better to just change the style of one's posts. Remember, being
> moderated doesn't mean being banned, it just means having every post
> approved before it goes through to the list. So for example if someone
> is being too abusive, I might moderate them, then reject future posts
> one at a time with an explanation of what was wrong with it, and how
> they should reword it. Or sometimes I'll end up just rejecting some
> messages and letting others through. Some of the people in this
> category have ended up sending 20+ messages a day, half of which were
> sarcastic one liners like "Yeah, right." Really positive, helpful
> stuff.
>
> Steve

Peter said this better than I can:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-August/078970.html